Home / Opinion Digest / Arbitration


Feed Subscription

Arbitration – Procedural Unconscionability – Substantively Enforceable – Real Property – Mobile Home – Mortgages – Civil Practice – Federal Jurisdiction – Diversity (access required)

Mansfield v. Vanderbilt Mortgage & Finance, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-02-0595, 17 pp.) (Louise Flanagan, J.) 7:13-cv-00257; E.D.N.C. Holding: Even though the defendant-lender engaged in procedural naughtiness by rushing the plaintiff-borrower through the closing and not pointing out the undistinguished ...

Read More »

Arbitration – First Impression – Corporate Principals – Piercing the Veil – Defunct Corporation – Breach of Contract Claim (access required)

Cold Springs Ventures, LLC v. Gilead Sciences, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-15-0328, 21 pp.) (John Jolly Jr., Ch.J.) 2014 NCBC 10 Holding: In order to determine whether plaintiffs, as principals of a now-defunct corporation, will be required to arbitrate defendant ...

Read More »

Arbitration – Civil Practice – Unauthenticated Documents – Loan Agreements – Online Lenders – Originating Banks – Usury Claim (access required)

Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank, N.A. (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-03-0224, 7 pp.) (Catherine Eagles, J.) 1:13-cv-00897; M.D.N.C. Holding: Defendants seek to compel arbitration based on arbitration clauses in the loan agreements referenced in the complaint; however, plaintiff disputes the authenticity ...

Read More »

Arbitration – Unconscionability – Class Action Prohibition – Defunct Arbitrators – Substitute (access required)

Torrence v. Nationwide Budget Finance (Lawyers Weekly No. 14-07-0112, 47 pp.) (Sanford L. Steelman Jr., J.) Appealed from New Hanover County Superior Court (D. Jack Hooks Jr., J.) N.C. App. http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=29423 Holding: The N.C. Supreme Court’s decision in Tillman v. ...

Read More »

Arbitration – Waiver — Civil Practice – Class Action – Unnamed Plaintiffs (access required)

Elliott v. KB Home North Carolina, Inc. : In a case where the named plaintiffs filed their proposed class action on Dec. 5, 2008, and defendant participated in litigation (while plaintiffs were incurring legal fees of $100,000) without demanding arbitration until March 28, 2012, defendant has waived its right to arbitration against both the named and unnamed plaintiffs.

Read More »
Scroll To Top